Re: [ga] Re: Membership criteria - compromise

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Jefsey and all assembly members,

jefsey wrote:

> On 07:18 18/05/02, William X Walsh said:
> >This doesn't discourage outreach at all, it discourages single issue
> >outreach that is based on an attempt to influence the outcome of a
> >vote.  Outreach that is intended to increase the broad and meaningful
> >participation, which is what we should all be encouraging, would still
> >be of great use.  Even if the awareness of the outreach is because of
> >a single issue that they can't influence by pulling a hit and run and
> >joining only for that single issue.
>
> Ted, WXW and Joe (on the online voting system),
> IMHO both of you have good and valid points and no need to become personal.
> The problem seems more related to the software tools. Let assume we have
> the following management system.
>
> 1. anyone can register in the GA, chosing which mail distribution, he wants
> and becoming a voter.
> 2. you can change e-mail without changing Membership ID
> 3. we can run votes and information polls freely. Let say that every week
> we have a poll over the debated issues (10 seconds to list a question for
> polling). Votes on Chair decision.
> 4. your vote is taken into consideration after you participated at least
> into 10 polls.
>
> Would you not accept it?

  No I would not except it in this form or Format.  It would
essentially relegate any new participant to second class status
for a given period of time.  That is and assumption that is not
in evidence or not truly known.  Hence it is just as likely to
be invalid...

>
>
> - Outreach is supported as even "stuffing" the list would result into polls
> slides, telling the voters there is something to consider.
> - Education is ensured because if you vote 10 times it means that you did
> not get bored and debated. You really proved you wanted to join.

  This is assuming that the new or unheard from participant
is in need of education of some sort.  That is again an assumption
that is likely invalid.

>
> - Hi-Jacking is quite impossible: asking hi-jackers to vote 10 times in a
> row to get a vote the 11th time would cost a lot.
> - Yet the DNSO stays open to all and everyone may immediately contribute
> and even influence a vote by his positions and hos poll, the voter may
> filter and consider

  You can do this now anyway.  So I see not intrinsic value here...

>
>
> An occasional slide would have no impact if an obvious hi-jacking attempt
> (from the difference with previous polls and with votes). But a growing
> poll tendency or a very high poll support (therefore voters supported by
> pollers) would speak a lot.
>
> It would even permit very quick responses: a stuffing could lead to a quick
> verification vote. A 95% poll supported by a 75% votes would really mean
> the GA really supports something. While a 90% poll supported by a 45%
> vote  would mean hi-jacking attempt and kill the reputation of the stuffers
> and the enthousiam of their supporters.
>
> I note that I prefer the poll count than a residency period, because
> responding to a poll is an active effort. Also because it permits lurkers
> to progressively join, and often these people are reasonable people taking
> time to join the debate.
>
> jfc
>
>

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html